Randy - Does SB 35's "streamlined, ministerial approval" apply to the office and retail portion?

From: Randy S

Date: Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM
Subject: SB 35 & the latest Vallco proposal
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, City Attorney's Office <CityAttorney@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.org>, piug@cupertino.org, David Brandt <Davidb@cupertino.org>

Dear Council and City Attorney,

I have these comments on Sand Hill Property Company's latest proposal for Vallco.

SB 35 only applies to housing development approvals.

CHAPTER 4.2. Housing Development Approvals [65913 - 65914]

(a) A development proponent may submit an application for a development that is subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process provided by subdivision (b) and not subject to a conditional use permit if the development satisfies all of the following objective planning standards:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=65913.4.&lawCode=GOV

Here's what I could find regarding "ministerial approval."

15369. Ministerial

"Ministerial" describes a governmental decision involving little or no personal judgment by the public official as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project. The public official merely applies the law to the facts as presented but uses no special discretion or judgment in reaching a decision. A ministerial decision involves only the use of fixed standards or objective measurements, and the public official cannot use personal, subjective judgment in deciding whether or how the project should be carried out. Common examples of ministerial permits include automobile registrations, dog licenses, and marriage licenses. A building permit is ministerial if the ordinance requiring the permit limits the public official to determining whether the zoning allows the structure to be built in the requested location, the structure would meet the strength requirements in the Uniform Building Code, and the applicant has paid his fee.

http://www.resources.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/art20.html#15369

​

I think the biggest issue is whether SB 35's "streamlined, ministerial approval" applies to a development project that contains ​elements that are not housing related.  I would claim that it should not, and that ministerial approval should only apply to the housing portion of San Hill's latest proposed development project.  The office and retail portion of the proposed projects are not subject to "streamlined, ministerial approval."

I would also argue that "ministerial approval" does not mean that an EIR is not required.  Since a "ministerial" determination was made that an EIR is required, SB 35 shouldn't affect that earlier decision.

The office allocation of 2,000,000 sq. ft. approved in Resolution 14-210 is "contingent" on the "timely preparation of a specific plan."  A Specific Plan has to be approved before the office allocation is considered entitled, and the clock is ticking on the revocation of that allocation.  (Resolution 14-210 is attached)

As stated, these Approved Project allocations rely in part on timely preparation of a specific

plan for the Vallco Shopping District that meets the requirements of the General Plan. If a

Vallco Shopping District Specific Plan is not approved by May 31, 2018, then the City will

consider removing the 2,000,000 square feet of office allocation from the Vallco Shopping

District.

​Thank you for your consideration,

Randy S

San Jose​